[PATCH v2 3/5] ieframe: Add stub implementation of IInternetExplorerManager.

[Zebediah Figura]

On 08/10/2017 09:33 AM, Jacek Caban wrote:
> On 09.08.2017 20:12, Zebediah Figura wrote:
>> On 08/09/2017 06:07 AM, Jacek Caban wrote:
>>> Hi Zebediah,
>>>
>>> On 08.08.2017 20:04, Zebediah Figura wrote:
>>>>   HRESULT register_class_object(BOOL do_reg)
>>>>   {
>>>>       HRESULT hres;
>>>>   -    static DWORD cookie;
>>>> +    static DWORD ie_cookie, iem_cookie;
>>>>         if(do_reg) {
>>>>           hres = CoRegisterClassObject(&CLSID_InternetExplorer,
>>>>                   (IUnknown*)&InternetExplorerFactory, CLSCTX_SERVER,
>>>> -                REGCLS_MULTIPLEUSE|REGCLS_SUSPENDED, &cookie);
>>>> -        if (FAILED(hres)) {
>>>> +                REGCLS_MULTIPLEUSE, &ie_cookie);
>>>> +        if (FAILED(hres))
>>>> +            ERR("failed to register object %08x\n", hres);
>>>> +        hres = CoRegisterClassObject(&CLSID_InternetExplorerManager,
>>>> + (IUnknown*)&InternetExplorerManagerFactory, CLSCTX_SERVER,
>>>> +                REGCLS_MULTIPLEUSE, &iem_cookie);
>>>> +        if (FAILED(hres))
>>>>               ERR("failed to register object %08x\n", hres);
>>>> -            return hres;
>>>> -        }
>>>> -
>>>> -        hres = CoResumeClassObjects();
>>>> -        if(SUCCEEDED(hres))
>>>> -            return hres;
>>>> -
>>>> -        ERR("failed to resume object %08x\n", hres);
>>>>       }
>>>> -
>>>> -    return CoRevokeClassObject(cookie);
>>>> +    else
>>>> +    {
>>>> +        hres = CoRevokeClassObject(ie_cookie);
>>>> +        if (FAILED(hres))
>>>> +            ERR("failed to register object %08x\n", hres);
>>>> +        hres = CoRevokeClassObject(iem_cookie);
>>>> +        if (FAILED(hres))
>>>> +            ERR("failed to register object %08x\n", hres);
>>>> +    }
>>>> +    return hres;
>>>>   }
>>>
>>> Are you sure that's how it's supposed to work? I didn't test it 
>>> myself, but given how it's registered and documented, I'd expect that 
>>> CLSID_InternetExplorerManager should live in a different process from 
>>> CLSID_InternetExplorer. It should be easy to distinguish those 
>>> processes with -startmanager command line argument.
>>>
>>
>> I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Isn't 
>> CoRegisterClassObject process-agnostic? 
> 
> 
> It is in a sense that created proxy/stub abstract where the object 
> lives, yes. But note that the actual instance of IE object must live in 
> one process or another. There is a lot of different aspects like 
> pluggable protocols, script engines, ActiveX objects, document objects 
> that live in its process and it's quite important for them which process 
> it is. I did a bit of testing and it seems to be a separated process on 
> Windows, so we should follow that.
> 
> 
> Jacek
> 

Isn't the IEM object already created in a different process with this 
patch (namely, iexplore.exe -startmanager), since it has to be created 
with CLSCTX_LOCAL_SERVER? And using CoCreateInstance, as with my 
previous patch, should also create an InternetExplorer instance in 
another process?

I don't understand DCOM very well. Perhaps you could expound on said 
testing?